Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Cullyn rori@********.com.au
Subject: [Slightly OT]China and the Internet
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 07:02:19 GMT
I cant remember this coming up from anyone... so I will post it
anyway...

It appears China is getting ready for a war, most people dont even
know has the possibility of existing.

However if you will turn to page 345 of your Shadowrun text, you will
notice that war was predicted in this way back in 1989. *smirk*

Anyway. My ON TOPIC question is, what are peoples opinions on this
warfare type?

We obviously have someone priming their weapons, and it would be
stupid of us not to do the same.. but the problem is... until we have
seen this type of war, how do we know what to do to defend against our
enemy?

Interesting concept when you gather a bit of intel. There was a
recent Australian PC mag that was talking to someone in the US about
hacking and the like. The comment was that the Chinese government
does all but encourage their people to try to hack into US systems.
Its really quite nasty.

Anyway, to recap, what do we think about this warfare? If it started
today, what impact would that have on the computer industry, and
things like that? Would a concept like a datajack be investigated to
speed up our peoples response to a realtime attack?

Talk to you soon

Cullyn
Message no. 2
From: Cullyn rori@********.com.au
Subject: [Slightly OT]China and the Internet
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 07:15:30 GMT
On Mon, 22 Nov 1999 07:02:19 GMT, you wrote:

>I cant remember this coming up from anyone... so I will post it
>anyway...
>
>It appears China is getting ready for a war, most people dont even
>know has the possibility of existing.
>
>However if you will turn to page 345 of your Shadowrun text, you will
>notice that war was predicted in this way back in 1989. *smirk*
>
>Anyway. My ON TOPIC question is, what are peoples opinions on this
>warfare type?
>
>We obviously have someone priming their weapons, and it would be
>stupid of us not to do the same.. but the problem is... until we have
>seen this type of war, how do we know what to do to defend against our
>enemy?
>
>Interesting concept when you gather a bit of intel. There was a
>recent Australian PC mag that was talking to someone in the US about
>hacking and the like. The comment was that the Chinese government
>does all but encourage their people to try to hack into US systems.
>Its really quite nasty.
>
>Anyway, to recap, what do we think about this warfare? If it started
>today, what impact would that have on the computer industry, and
>things like that? Would a concept like a datajack be investigated to
>speed up our peoples response to a realtime attack?
>
>Talk to you soon
>
>Cullyn

Yes yes yes.. im an idiot... here is the URL

http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid™/11/16/1518251&mode=thread

Cullyn
Message no. 3
From: Raije murk@****.org.au
Subject: [Slightly OT]China and the Internet
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 16:54:54 +1100
> Interesting concept when you gather a bit of intel. There was a
> recent Australian PC mag that was talking to someone in the US about
> hacking and the like. The comment was that the Chinese government
> does all but encourage their people to try to hack into US systems.
> Its really quite nasty.
>

*quite* nasty? I think it goes over that chummer. It meant that everybody
with a datajack essentially becomes a soldier. With China's population they
would be almost unstoppable _if_ they could be organised into some sort of
"People's Virtual Army" or something like that.

_____________________sabrepunk@**********.net_
Raije
sabrepunk@**********.net
UIN-2799894
~Simple Guide to Cyberpunk~
http://gateway.to/cyberpunk/
"Shit Happens, So Carry Toilet Paper"
Message no. 4
From: Tzeentch tzeentch666@*********.net
Subject: [Slightly OT]China and the Internet
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 21:55:57 -0800
> > Interesting concept when you gather a bit of intel. There was a
> > recent Australian PC mag that was talking to someone in the US about
> > hacking and the like. The comment was that the Chinese government
> > does all but encourage their people to try to hack into US systems.
> > Its really quite nasty.

<cough> Big Furry Deal. The classified internets are not quite so vulnerable
as you might believe. So they can deface unclassified websites and get news
stories from clueless reporters, not world shattering news.

> *quite* nasty? I think it goes over that chummer. It meant that
everybody
> with a datajack essentially becomes a soldier. With China's population
they
> would be almost unstoppable _if_ they could be organised into some sort of
> "People's Virtual Army" or something like that.

Only in the Shadowrun universe chummer. Sounds like you have been reading
too many Air Force "information warfare" briefs. What a joke :)

Ken


> Raije
> sabrepunk@**********.net
> UIN-2799894
> ~Simple Guide to Cyberpunk~
> http://gateway.to/cyberpunk/
> "Shit Happens, So Carry Toilet Paper"
>
>
>
Message no. 5
From: Scott W iscottw@*****.nb.ca
Subject: [Slightly OT]China and the Internet
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 1999 08:30:59 -0400
"And now, a Channel 6 editorial reply to Tzeentch."
] > *quite* nasty? I think it goes over that chummer. It meant that
] everybody
] > with a datajack essentially becomes a soldier. With China's population
] they
] > would be almost unstoppable _if_ they could be organised into some sort of
] > "People's Virtual Army" or something like that.
]
] Only in the Shadowrun universe chummer. Sounds like you have been reading
] too many Air Force "information warfare" briefs. What a joke :)

Even in the Shadowrun universe, I doubt the number of people in China
who could afford a datajack (or who have a need for one) has increased.
Also, isn't the country now divided into many different warring
states? That would certainly lessen the size of that Virtual Army.

-Boondocker
Message no. 6
From: Cullyn rori@********.com.au
Subject: [Slightly OT]China and the Internet
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 1999 23:51:25 GMT
On Thu, 25 Nov 1999 21:55:57 -0800, Ken wrote:

>> > Interesting concept when you gather a bit of intel. There was a
>> > recent Australian PC mag that was talking to someone in the US about
>> > hacking and the like. The comment was that the Chinese government
>> > does all but encourage their people to try to hack into US systems.
>> > Its really quite nasty.
>
><cough> Big Furry Deal. The classified internets are not quite so vulnerable
>as you might believe. So they can deface unclassified websites and get news
>stories from clueless reporters, not world shattering news.
>

Sorry to say, but this hacking into US systems isnt about CNN or
changing what an image looks like, it includes but not limited to
NASA, CIA, FBI, and various govt depts.

CIA even told their own men to 'try' to hack into their own site, some
security issues were seen to almost directly after this trial :>

I will check what magazine it was when i go back to work (weekend) and
let you know as much as I can.

Still, I think its easy to see that its not only news stories and
unclassified websites.

Cullyn
- Not going to China for the New Year.
Message no. 7
From: Tzeentch tzeentch666@*********.net
Subject: [Slightly OT]China and the Internet
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 1999 16:28:41 -0800
> Sorry to say, but this hacking into US systems isnt about CNN or
> changing what an image looks like, it includes but not limited to
> NASA, CIA, FBI, and various govt depts.

Uh. Uh huh. You've been watching 'Hackers' too much or something :) The
classified internet only ROUTES traffic over the normal internet. If they
want to intercept ciphertext hey, more power to em! If someone "hacks" the
CIA site that's just some unclassified site that you would be hard pressed
to even find confidential info on. Not to say the goverment does not take it
seriously though, "information warfare" is the newest buzzword around the
computer illiterate pentagon powerhouses don't ya know.

> CIA even told their own men to 'try' to hack into their own site, some
> security issues were seen to almost directly after this trial :>

Hahah. Hack their own site? I'm assuming they just attempted common exploits
on their webservers. I have YET to see anyone 'hack' a secure system or even
read a report about one. Let the script-kiddies deface the CIAs homepage,
I'm not losing any sleep right now about anything important being
compromised.

> I will check what magazine it was when i go back to work (weekend) and
> let you know as much as I can.

Please do so, should be interesting to see if it has any basis in reality.

> Still, I think its easy to see that its not only news stories and
> unclassified websites.

Err I think it is. The SIRPNet is NOT the internet we are using right now.
It uses the same protocols, that's about it. All routed traffic is encrypted
and the only terminals are in secure locations (though that is becoming
somewhat more liberal). It can be called a really big intranet and the NSA
and CIA both maintain their own intranets that are separate from even the
SIRPNet. As you move up in classification each level is separate from the
one below it, although traffic is still routed over the same lines. You can
NOT, I repeat NOT just hack into a secret network with your home computer -
I don't care how "l33t" you are.

NIPRNet (normal internet) - Standard firewalls, access lists, IP loggin, etc
etc. Some automated systems to monitor access (these stupid things are where
the reports of "thousands" of hacking attempts come from since they usually
treat even pings and attempted ftp connects as "hack attempts").
SIPRNet (secret internet) - Limited use of "normal" security measures since
they are not as needed. All traffic between sites is encrypted (128 bit DES
IIRC). Terminals must be located in accredited secure locations (like a
vault). You can't have the same machine hooked up to the normal internet and
the SIRPNet (officers ask this all the time). If the terminals are located
away from the router it is usually required that the lines be fiber to
prevent tapping (well, make it harder that is..).
TIPRNet (top secret internet)- As above, but its traffic is piggybacked on
the SIRP side as encryped traffic (ie it's double encrypted). Terminals have
VERY stringent requirements and you cannot modifiy the software or settings
unless explicitely authorized. All IPs are logged and if the NOC detects and
unauthorized machine on the network you are in deep trouble :)

Clear as mud?

I should do a writeup of the Shadowrun futures military network...could be
interesting.

Ken
- Still waiting for the millenium cults to appear...come on you guys! Make
this New Year exciting!

> Cullyn
> - Not going to China for the New Year.
Message no. 8
From: Cullyn rori@********.com.au
Subject: [Slightly OT]China and the Internet
Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1999 05:28:53 GMT
On Fri, 26 Nov 1999 16:28:41 -0800, Ken wrote:

>Uh. Uh huh. You've been watching 'Hackers' too much or something :) The
>classified internet only ROUTES traffic over the normal internet. If they
>want to intercept ciphertext hey, more power to em! If someone "hacks" the
>CIA site that's just some unclassified site that you would be hard pressed
>to even find confidential info on. Not to say the goverment does not take it
>seriously though, "information warfare" is the newest buzzword around the
>computer illiterate pentagon powerhouses don't ya know.
>> CIA even told their own men to 'try' to hack into their own site, some
>> security issues were seen to almost directly after this trial :>
>
>Hahah. Hack their own site? I'm assuming they just attempted common exploits
>on their webservers. I have YET to see anyone 'hack' a secure system or even
>read a report about one. Let the script-kiddies deface the CIAs homepage,
>I'm not losing any sleep right now about anything important being
>compromised.

Well... I can only go off what I've read. Then again... 90% of its
bullshit so... hey... I'm willing to accept that it is in that 90%...
then again, you could be in that 90% too *grin*

>Err I think it is. The SIRPNet is NOT the internet we are using right now.
>It uses the same protocols, that's about it. All routed traffic is encrypted
>and the only terminals are in secure locations (though that is becoming
>somewhat more liberal). It can be called a really big intranet and the NSA
>and CIA both maintain their own intranets that are separate from even the
>SIRPNet. As you move up in classification each level is separate from the
>one below it, although traffic is still routed over the same lines. You can
>NOT, I repeat NOT just hack into a secret network with your home computer -
>I don't care how "l33t" you are.
>
>NIPRNet (normal internet) - Standard firewalls, access lists, IP loggin, etc
>etc. Some automated systems to monitor access (these stupid things are where
>the reports of "thousands" of hacking attempts come from since they usually
>treat even pings and attempted ftp connects as "hack attempts").
>SIPRNet (secret internet) - Limited use of "normal" security measures since
>they are not as needed. All traffic between sites is encrypted (128 bit DES
>IIRC). Terminals must be located in accredited secure locations (like a
>vault). You can't have the same machine hooked up to the normal internet and
>the SIRPNet (officers ask this all the time). If the terminals are located
>away from the router it is usually required that the lines be fiber to
>prevent tapping (well, make it harder that is..).
>TIPRNet (top secret internet)- As above, but its traffic is piggybacked on
>the SIRP side as encryped traffic (ie it's double encrypted). Terminals have
>VERY stringent requirements and you cannot modifiy the software or settings
>unless explicitely authorized. All IPs are logged and if the NOC detects and
>unauthorized machine on the network you are in deep trouble :)
>
>Clear as mud?
>
>I should do a writeup of the Shadowrun futures military network...could be
>interesting.

Ken, Your info is very interesting. I'd love to read what you would
write up for this stuff.

Please do write it up.

And thanks for responding, because clearing up hype vs truth is
something I like to believe is possible.

If it gets too unrelated to SR (we never do that now do we ;) just
post it to me privately. You have got me listening...

Cullyn
- A Y2K Cult. hmmm. "Please join our order, we have verK much we maK
do this Kear."
Message no. 9
From: Mik Williams legion@******.net.au
Subject: [Slightly OT]China and the Internet
Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1999 17:17:58 +1100
hell, i'd love to get my hands on info like that. please send it. If not to
the list, i'll join Cullyn in asking for private email :)

Mik
legion@******.net.au
mwilliams3@***********.newcastle.edu.au
URL : http://welcome.to/hangfires.home
ICQ : 15142762
> >I should do a writeup of the Shadowrun futures military network...could
be
> >interesting.
>
> Ken, Your info is very interesting. I'd love to read what you would
> write up for this stuff.
>
> Please do write it up.
>
> And thanks for responding, because clearing up hype vs truth is
> something I like to believe is possible.
>
> If it gets too unrelated to SR (we never do that now do we ;) just
> post it to me privately. You have got me listening...
>
> Cullyn
> - A Y2K Cult. hmmm. "Please join our order, we have verK much we maK
> do this Kear."
>
>
Message no. 10
From: Sommers sommers@*****.umich.edu
Subject: [Slightly OT]China and the Internet
Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1999 13:30:17 -0500
At 07:28 PM 11/26/99 , Tzeentch wrote:
> > Sorry to say, but this hacking into US systems isnt about CNN or
> > changing what an image looks like, it includes but not limited to
> > NASA, CIA, FBI, and various govt depts.
>
>Uh. Uh huh. You've been watching 'Hackers' too much or something :) The
>classified internet only ROUTES traffic over the normal internet. If they
>want to intercept ciphertext hey, more power to em! If someone "hacks" the
>CIA site that's just some unclassified site that you would be hard pressed
>to even find confidential info on. Not to say the goverment does not take it
>seriously though, "information warfare" is the newest buzzword around the
>computer illiterate pentagon powerhouses don't ya know.

I snipped the rest of your email, about the different levels of computer
connections that the US govt uses. It was very interesting and quite
useful, going into my saved mailbox. However, your comments above do miss
an important point. It does matter if an outside group hacks unclassified
sites, whether the CIA or the army. Just like everyone else, they rely on
these forms of communications to do all of the normal everyday functions of
work. Sure you might not be able to hack in and download you dossier from
the FBI. But what if you're able to block their email routers so they can't
communicate with their field offices? Hell, what if you hack the
non-classified system that houses the supplies system and tell it that you
have a 2 month supply of TP for the J. Edgar Hoover building instead of 2 days?

If you can, find a copy of the July 1999 issue of Popular Science and refer
to the War.Com article on pages 81-84. The gist is about an Air Force base
that was being used as a relay point to re-route 10's of thousands of
emails a day. An entire form of cyber-combat evolved from this one base.
Its a really interesting read on what decking could be like. For those of
you out there who don't think that a few SINless could affect a big corp in
SR, substitute a corp for that base and imagine what 10 deckers could do if
they were cheesed off.


Sommers
Insert witty quote here.
Message no. 11
From: Tzeentch tzeentch666@*********.net
Subject: [Slightly OT]China and the Internet
Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1999 14:01:37 -0800
> I snipped the rest of your email, about the different levels of computer
> connections that the US govt uses. It was very interesting and quite
> useful, going into my saved mailbox. However, your comments above do miss
> an important point. It does matter if an outside group hacks unclassified
> sites, whether the CIA or the army. Just like everyone else, they rely on
> these forms of communications to do all of the normal everyday functions
of
> work. Sure you might not be able to hack in and download you dossier from
> the FBI. But what if you're able to block their email routers so they
can't
> communicate with their field offices? Hell, what if you hack the
> non-classified system that houses the supplies system and tell it that you
> have a 2 month supply of TP for the J. Edgar Hoover building instead of 2
days?

Hmm, well I guess your definition of important and mine are pretty
different. I just can't quite get my adrenaline flowing over running out of
toilet paper from a vicious hacker attack (they really hit you where it
counts!!). Denial of Service attacks are a constant threat, any fool can
ping flood a poorly set up site. You just have to hope that the sysadmins
are competent.

> If you can, find a copy of the July 1999 issue of Popular Science and
refer
> to the War.Com article on pages 81-84. The gist is about an Air Force base
> that was being used as a relay point to re-route 10's of thousands of
> emails a day. An entire form of cyber-combat evolved from this one base.
> Its a really interesting read on what decking could be like. For those of
> you out there who don't think that a few SINless could affect a big corp
in
> SR, substitute a corp for that base and imagine what 10 deckers could do
if
> they were cheesed off.

You'll have to excuse me if I yarf every time I hear the terms "cyberwar".
Most of the time it seems that its a boogyman trotted out to justify some of
the Air Forces (and other branches) pet "information warfare" programs.
Whatever THAT is supposed to mean. Defacing someones webpage or shutting
down a website seems as fascinating to me as watching paint dry.

In SR terms what rally can your decker buddies do? Let's say MegaCorporate
Evildoers A really hose off every decker in Seattle and they decide to do
something about it. Now in SR noones heard of VLANs or encrypting their
traffic - their idea is just plain cutting things off from the net or having
everything in a PLTG. What can you do then? Prank call them? You could
attack their public sites and crash them or reroute pampers to their
executive bathroom but you're sure not hurting their bottom line unless you
count disgruntled Matrix users who can't use their sites and some services
(I'm assuming things like cable access and the like are protected or off the
normal Matrix). If you do shut down something fairly important or clog up
their systems with DOS (denial of service) attacks they can always route
around the problem or use other methods of getting business done (even
simply calling people instead of emailing or whatnot). And they can spend
their sweet time tracking you down.

As far as the military goes there is an general trend for reduncancy. This
has somewhat lessened over the years with the big push to use COTS
(commerical, off the shelf) technology and processes but it's still there.
If where I worked was totally cut off from the internet, siprnet and tiprnet
we would have an angry general (the brass loves to have resources available
even if they never use them - it's like having a better car then the other
Generals) but life would go on. Instead of getting messages off the net we
would have them faxed to us. Classified items would be hand couriered. We
would have to use dial-up connections (though those are ungodly slow because
of the cryptogear).

As far as supplies and stuff go I suppose you could possbily monkey around
with that but we are not rationed items from some big store in the sky. We
have a set amount of money to buy supplies. If we want paper, guess what, we
have to pay for it - it's from a goverment 'store' run by the GSA and we
can't use the money for anything else but it's not free or issued. If we run
out of toilet paper we could always use our own personal funds
(building-wide toilet paper is from another fund). It will be John Wayne TP
but them's the breaks.

For a laugh check out http://www.infowar.com/ that should make it quite
clear who is drving this particular little gremlin. Funny how the site is
filled with ads for security software.hmmm

Lates,
Ken

> Sommers
> Insert witty quote here.
>
>
Message no. 12
From: Sommers sommers@*****.umich.edu
Subject: [Slightly OT]China and the Internet
Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1999 17:40:02 -0500
At 05:01 PM 11/27/99 , Tzeentch wrote:
>Hmm, well I guess your definition of important and mine are pretty
>different. I just can't quite get my adrenaline flowing over running out of
>toilet paper from a vicious hacker attack (they really hit you where it
>counts!!). Denial of Service attacks are a constant threat, any fool can
>ping flood a poorly set up site. You just have to hope that the sysadmins
>are competent.

Okay, I used that as a funny example. But It could very well be a serious
problem. How effective is your office going to be if you start running low
on basic things like toilet paper, or paper and toner for the printers, or
staples, or any of the useful little things that no-one ever thinks of as
high-priority. Hell, my office almost shuts down when the coffee maker is
on the fritz! :)

Even with competent sysadmins, a well done DoS attack can slow down all of
your processing to the point where your more mission critical functions are
hampered.

> > If you can, find a copy of the July 1999 issue of Popular Science and
>refer
> > to the War.Com article on pages 81-84. The gist is about an Air Force base
> > that was being used as a relay point to re-route 10's of thousands of
> > emails a day. An entire form of cyber-combat evolved from this one base.
> > Its a really interesting read on what decking could be like. For those of
> > you out there who don't think that a few SINless could affect a big corp
>in
> > SR, substitute a corp for that base and imagine what 10 deckers could do
>if
> > they were cheesed off.
>
>You'll have to excuse me if I yarf every time I hear the terms "cyberwar".
>Most of the time it seems that its a boogyman trotted out to justify some of
>the Air Forces (and other branches) pet "information warfare" programs.
>Whatever THAT is supposed to mean. Defacing someones webpage or shutting
>down a website seems as fascinating to me as watching paint dry.

What about the Dell website that was down a few days ago. They lost an
estimated tens of millions of dollars in sales over 2 days because their
webpage, where a lot of their sales are made, was inaccessible. Defacing a
site or causing it to shut down can be very serious, and will only get more
so as the world becomes more wired. How many companies are now using their
websites to interface with other companies for inventory tracking, checking
out sub-contractors, online sales, customer feedback?

>In SR terms what rally can your decker buddies do? Let's say MegaCorporate
>Evildoers A really hose off every decker in Seattle and they decide to do
>something about it. Now in SR noones heard of VLANs or encrypting their
>traffic - their idea is just plain cutting things off from the net or having
>everything in a PLTG. What can you do then? Prank call them? You could
>attack their public sites and crash them or reroute pampers to their
>executive bathroom but you're sure not hurting their bottom line unless you
>count disgruntled Matrix users who can't use their sites and some services
>(I'm assuming things like cable access and the like are protected or off the
>normal Matrix). If you do shut down something fairly important or clog up
>their systems with DOS (denial of service) attacks they can always route
>around the problem or use other methods of getting business done (even
>simply calling people instead of emailing or whatnot). And they can spend
>their sweet time tracking you down.

You've made one big mistake in your assumptions there, that cable access
(and phones for that matter) are all off the Matrix. While its not as sexy
as running the Matrix off of a cyberdeck, all of the other stuff is where
the nuts and bolts are. The Matrix IS all of that information, whether its
phone, trideo, normal data access, simsense access (what people normally
think of when they think of the Matrix), faxes, everything. If you're
determined enough, you can make it so that none of it gets out.

Let's go with a slightly extreme example: the Aztechnology Pyramid in
Seattle. They've cheesed off enough deckers that a bunch get together and
decide to do something about it. The Dead Deckers Society decides to make a
DoS attack on the pyamid. Its got its own PLTG in the Seattle Matrix, and
has to connect to the rest of the RTG. The DDS spends a few days making
copies of all of their little smart frames, with the sole purpose of
e-mailing, faxing, and otherwise sending info into the pyramid. When
they're sent out, their sole function is to log onto a host, send out a
crapload of data, and then goto another host.

Back at the pyramid, the sysadins are sipping soykaff when all of the
sudden their traffic jumps up 10 fold in about a minute. Every connection
between them and the rest of the RTG is now soaked to capacity. Stuff is
getting turned away, and their storage capacity is getting maxed out. The
phones are dropping calls, and all the fax machines are spitting out fliers
for the 1st Church of the Squishy Ball. So what do they do?

Their first option is to leave it up and try to stop it from the outside.
That means taxing their resources while they try and track down program all
over the net. Meanwhile, the system itself is more vulnerable since its
having a hard time telling what is going in and out. Teh other option is to
cut themselves off from the Matrix entirely. That means no computer
connections, no phones, no faxes, nada. So no sales department, no talking
to suppliers, no orders to factories, no communication with the outside
world period. You're left with cellular links, which are going to be used
for the most important business.

Net result is for as long as they take to track down those programs, the
pyramid is a mess.

>As far as the military goes there is an general trend for reduncancy. This
>has somewhat lessened over the years with the big push to use COTS
>(commerical, off the shelf) technology and processes but it's still there.
>If where I worked was totally cut off from the internet, siprnet and tiprnet
>we would have an angry general (the brass loves to have resources available
>even if they never use them - it's like having a better car then the other
>Generals) but life would go on. Instead of getting messages off the net we
>would have them faxed to us. Classified items would be hand couriered. We
>would have to use dial-up connections (though those are ungodly slow because
>of the cryptogear).

And the faxes now go through the Matrix. And the phones go through the
Matrix, no dial-up. Its all the same in SR, its all on the same system. The
amount of information going through these channels is going to increase
over the next 50 years, not decrease.

>As far as supplies and stuff go I suppose you could possbily monkey around
>with that but we are not rationed items from some big store in the sky. We
>have a set amount of money to buy supplies. If we want paper, guess what, we
>have to pay for it - it's from a goverment 'store' run by the GSA and we
>can't use the money for anything else but it's not free or issued. If we run
>out of toilet paper we could always use our own personal funds
>(building-wide toilet paper is from another fund). It will be John Wayne TP
>but them's the breaks.

Right, but you have to know that you're out of it. Where is that
information kept? In SR in would be on the Matrix. There would probably be
an automated ordering system to get in from the supplier when it reached a
certain level. Screw with that ordering process, whether its TP or toner,
staples or scotch tape, and the company slows down. Not to mention that it
would make a great way to get into a company. Hack the ordering system so
that an order is placed to a company, then have your team go in to make
delivery. How many times do you look at the water cooler guy? And I really
doubt that the data on the net is going to have the same level of security
as the research department. The supply weenie doesn't want to have Black IC
on his system, which is why its easier to mess with.

>For a laugh check out http://www.infowar.com/ that should make it quite
>clear who is drving this particular little gremlin. Funny how the site is
>filled with ads for security software.hmmm

I'll check it out.

Sommers
Insert witty quote here.
Message no. 13
From: Tzeentch tzeentch666@*********.net
Subject: [Slightly OT]China and the Internet
Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1999 15:16:56 -0800
> And the faxes now go through the Matrix. And the phones go through the
> Matrix, no dial-up. Its all the same in SR, its all on the same system.
The
> amount of information going through these channels is going to increase
> over the next 50 years, not decrease.

Hey, careful assuming EVERYTHING is on the Matrix or you will quickly find
yourself travelling down the slippery slope to <yuck> Cyberpunk 2020. There
is a LOT of data and traffic being sent over the telco lines now that you
can't see and there is no reason for you to see. There is absolutely no
reason why this would change in the future. The whole concept of cyberspace
has enough logical inconsistencies as it is without lumping every form of
data into the "Matrix".

Why would there be no dialups? Noone remembers how to make it work? Why
would you need to have the fax machine and cofeemaker hooked up to the net
(even ignoring some of the foolishness mentioned in VR1 and 2)? You can't
make a simple phone call without some decker "seeing" the phonecall zip off
in Matrixspace?? That's too much like Cyberpunk 2020, it sucked there and I
don't see why it would be any better in Shadowrun.

The Matrix is the conglomeration of all the worlds information services, it
does not have to mean all that information is in the same "space" as a
decker is. You only see what your system can process and it knows how to
handle. You won't "see" cable lines running around, or telephone celltowers.
That's all background material subsumed into the deckers virtual
represenation of the data. You can't "filter" your deck to see data moving
around either, because while it may be going over the same physical cables
as your traffic it's not reaching your deck, just like you can't "see" phone
calls travelling over the same phone lines as the internet.

I don't know, I think people keep thinking in the frame of a Gibsonesque
style cyberspace like in Cyberpunk, where you can associate the net with a
sort of astral plane that data somehow mysteriously travels around in.
Decking in SR is already way to close to being an alternate magic system as
it is.

As for spamming the Pyramid or whatnot I'd have my doubts as to what the
deckers could do since there are no official rules for what mainframes can
actually handle. All we know is that they are SICKLY powerful, even every
decker in Seattle may not be able to max out the bandwidth of a system of
that calibre. But given the knida wacky representation of things as
presented in SR (though I'll have to check my copy of Shadowbeat for
additional info) your scenario sounds plausible. But if it's that easy why
aren't all the megacorps under constant attack from other rival companies in
this manner (working through "Matrix Liberation Fronts")?

I'll disclaimer all the above by saying I'm not impressed with the logic of
the computer rules presented in cyberpunk games - they tend to make pretty
zany assumptions; some of which are pretty ridiculous without a lot of
handwaving and logical contortions (Black ICE? hahah). Shadowruns decking
system is so superior to CP2020s it's not even funny but it's still not
completely logical (though it does tend to be pretty fun).

Ken

> Sommers
> Insert witty quote here.
>
>
Message no. 14
From: Sommers sommers@*****.umich.edu
Subject: [Slightly OT]China and the Internet
Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1999 21:01:29 -0500
At 06:16 PM 11/27/99 , Tzeentch wrote:
> > And the faxes now go through the Matrix. And the phones go through the
> > Matrix, no dial-up. Its all the same in SR, its all on the same system.
>The
> > amount of information going through these channels is going to increase
> > over the next 50 years, not decrease.
>
>Hey, careful assuming EVERYTHING is on the Matrix or you will quickly find
>yourself travelling down the slippery slope to <yuck> Cyberpunk 2020. There
>is a LOT of data and traffic being sent over the telco lines now that you
>can't see and there is no reason for you to see. There is absolutely no
>reason why this would change in the future. The whole concept of cyberspace
>has enough logical inconsistencies as it is without lumping every form of
>data into the "Matrix".

First, I don't know anything about CP2020 since I've never really looked at
it. However, you can very easily extrapolate that everything is on the
Matrix. I don't know if its explicitly stated, but it is referred to
several times in Shadowbeat, Lone Star, and VR2. Its not that its changing
in the future, its changing now. What services do you have at home now?
Cable, phone, Internet, maybe fax? Your fax is already tied to your phone.
Your Internet is from dial-up (phone company), ISDN (phone company) or
cable modem (phone company). Your cable company wants to give you phone
access. ATT wants to sell you the Internet. DSS wants to send the Internet
and cable to you. All of them want to get in on the cellular. And every
time that a company buys another one or starts another part of the
business, it goes into the same pot.

Its all getting to be digital data. In another 20-30 years it'll be all
together. With all of that bandwidth, it'll be a lot easier to send it all
down the same pipe. That's why it'll change in the future. Now you might
not always see it when you jack into the Matrix. But it will be there as
data streams going in and out. It'll be there, so you can add more to it.

>Why would there be no dialups? Noone remembers how to make it work? Why
>would you need to have the fax machine and cofeemaker hooked up to the net
>(even ignoring some of the foolishness mentioned in VR1 and 2)? You can't
>make a simple phone call without some decker "seeing" the phonecall zip off
>in Matrixspace?? That's too much like Cyberpunk 2020, it sucked there and I
>don't see why it would be any better in Shadowrun.

There wouldn't be any dial-ups because the phone would access the same data
streams as the computer. The fax machine goes over the lines also. There's
no reason to hook up the cofeemaker, although they will be offered in the
so-called "smart homes" that MS envisions, and people have been talking
about for years.

See VR2 pages 116 for Make Comcall and pg 118 for Tap Comcall. System
operations you use to make calls directly from your deck and to tap into
existing calls. You have to find the particular call you want, but you can
do it.

>The Matrix is the conglomeration of all the worlds information services, it
>does not have to mean all that information is in the same "space" as a
>decker is. You only see what your system can process and it knows how to
>handle. You won't "see" cable lines running around, or telephone celltowers.
>That's all background material subsumed into the deckers virtual
>represenation of the data. You can't "filter" your deck to see data moving
>around either, because while it may be going over the same physical cables
>as your traffic it's not reaching your deck, just like you can't "see" phone
>calls travelling over the same phone lines as the internet.

If you have the hardware and software (like the phone company does) you can
see all of the data moving over the lines. Its all just ones and zeroes.
One of the first things the decker would want to do is ba able to access
all of that data. Its all going over the same lines, going through the same
routers. You're not going to see cable lines running around, just the data
flowing in and out. And since they are on the same lines, you don't need to
differentiate them. Make a smart frame that sends out phone calls every
second to every public number in the Pyramid (to carry the example). Also
have it send out emails to all public addresses. Those junctions lines are
going to get saturated pretty quick.

>I don't know, I think people keep thinking in the frame of a Gibsonesque
>style cyberspace like in Cyberpunk, where you can associate the net with a
>sort of astral plane that data somehow mysteriously travels around in.
>Decking in SR is already way to close to being an alternate magic system as
>it is.

The Matrix is just a way to interpret the way that all of this data is
flowing around over the same lines. Maybe its because he was really good at
predicting the ways it would develop?

>As for spamming the Pyramid or whatnot I'd have my doubts as to what the
>deckers could do since there are no official rules for what mainframes can
>actually handle. All we know is that they are SICKLY powerful, even every
>decker in Seattle may not be able to max out the bandwidth of a system of
>that calibre. But given the knida wacky representation of things as
>presented in SR (though I'll have to check my copy of Shadowbeat for
>additional info) your scenario sounds plausible. But if it's that easy why
>aren't all the megacorps under constant attack from other rival companies in
>this manner (working through "Matrix Liberation Fronts")?

You don't necessarily have to max out the mainframe to shut everything
down. Just certain chokepoints. How much traffic can the routers handle?
How many times does the phone have to ring with no-one there before the
sariman don't get anything done? All you have to do is make it too
difficult for them to accomplish their regular work and you've cost them
millions.

As to why they don't do it to each other all the time, that's easy. They
have to work together to get stuff done. No matter how big you are, there
is still stuff to be sold to someone else. A group of deckers could do it
because they don't have to work with the corps if they don't want to.

>I'll disclaimer all the above by saying I'm not impressed with the logic of
>the computer rules presented in cyberpunk games - they tend to make pretty
>zany assumptions; some of which are pretty ridiculous without a lot of
>handwaving and logical contortions (Black ICE? hahah). Shadowruns decking
>system is so superior to CP2020s it's not even funny but it's still not
>completely logical (though it does tend to be pretty fun).

I'm not sure that the whole concept of decking with the iconography would
be that beneficial, but I can see it enough to suspend my disbelief. Black
IC is actually a logical extension of that system. If you have a direct
connection between your brain and the computer, if the system could take
over your deck it could easily command it to send commands to your brain to
give you seizures and kill you. Smoke isn't going to come out of your ears,
but it'll still fry your gray matter.

Sommers
Insert witty quote here.
Message no. 15
From: Frank Pelletier (Trinity) fpelletier@******.usherb.ca
Subject: [Slightly OT]China and the Internet
Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1999 21:07:39 -0500
"Sommers" <sommers@*****.umich.edu> once wrote,

> >Hey, careful assuming EVERYTHING is on the Matrix or you will quickly
find
> >yourself travelling down the slippery slope to <yuck> Cyberpunk 2020.
There
> >is a LOT of data and traffic being sent over the telco lines now that you
> >can't see and there is no reason for you to see. There is absolutely no
> >reason why this would change in the future. The whole concept of
cyberspace
> >has enough logical inconsistencies as it is without lumping every form of
> >data into the "Matrix".
>
> First, I don't know anything about CP2020 since I've never really looked
at
> it. However, you can very easily extrapolate that everything is on the
> Matrix.

(snipped)

I don't doubt for one second that telco devices such as faxes, telephones,
modems, computers, etc, will all be interconnected in a near future. Hell,
it's happening right now.

But think for a second about that big word: "Everything". Why would a corp
have an internal security system wired to the 'Net? Closed computers full
of R&D data? Everything could be on the Matrix, yes, but not everything
SHOULD.

It all boils down to this. Does it enhance the functionality of said item
if its got a permanent connection to the Matrix. As I said, for most
electronic items, sure it does. Coffee makers? Dishwashers? My stereo
system? A car?

No. Sure we COULD wire them, make them controlable via Matrix. But why
should we? What would it add?

Nothing. That's why a decker who tries to scald an enemy by tapping his
shower to set it to "Hot" mode, well, I'd say "Nice try."

Trinity
---------------------------------------------
Frank Pelletier
fpelletier@******.usherb.ca
"Tout les matins du monde sont sans retour" - Marin Marais

Trin on the Undernet and EFNet
Message no. 16
From: Twist0059@***.com Twist0059@***.com
Subject: [Slightly OT]China and the Internet
Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1999 21:42:20 EST
In a message dated 11/27/99 9:12:37 PM Eastern Standard Time,
fpelletier@******.usherb.ca writes:

> But think for a second about that big word: "Everything". Why would a corp
> have an internal security system wired to the 'Net? Closed computers full
> of R&D data? Everything could be on the Matrix, yes, but not everything
> SHOULD.

There are plenty of examples of stand-alone mainframes in SR. Often, though,
interaction between the corp means they have to be hooked up to the matrix to
share information and coordinate business. The hot stuff will be protected
by VR2's nasty methods of vanishing and teleporting SANs. (Why does that
always remind me of the Krull?)

> It all boils down to this. Does it enhance the functionality of said item
> if its got a permanent connection to the Matrix. As I said, for most
> electronic items, sure it does. Coffee makers? Dishwashers? My stereo
> system? A car?


I'd have to disagree on this. Automated homes seem all the rage even now,
when our tech is considerably further behind SR. I think the apartments of
wage slaves are almost always wired to the corp's mainframe, and that
mainframe is on the net. As for cars, there is GridGuide, but the security
on that must be horrible.






-Twist
Message no. 17
From: Sommers sommers@*****.umich.edu
Subject: [Slightly OT]China and the Internet
Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1999 22:42:10 -0500
At 09:07 PM 11/27/99 , Frank Pelletier \(Trinity\) wrote:
>(snipped)
>
>I don't doubt for one second that telco devices such as faxes, telephones,
>modems, computers, etc, will all be interconnected in a near future. Hell,
>it's happening right now.

Its not even that they are interconnected. Its that they are running on the
same wiring. If all of this stuff runs over the same wire, and its all
digital data, then you can manipulate it in the same way, or at least block
one kind with an overload of another kind.

>But think for a second about that big word: "Everything". Why would a corp
>have an internal security system wired to the 'Net? Closed computers full
>of R&D data? Everything could be on the Matrix, yes, but not everything
>SHOULD.

They won't have internal security tied to the Matrix, unless they want to
access it from off-site for some reason. Neither will the R&D data. But
they will probably have some means of manually turning this access on when
needed. For example, if you wanted to transfer all of that R&D data to the
alternate facility, or you wanted to update the security files and
procedures from the main office. In this case, its a good idea for a
shadowrun to infiltrate the facility and flip that switch so that your
decker can have his way with their system.

>It all boils down to this. Does it enhance the functionality of said item
>if its got a permanent connection to the Matrix. As I said, for most
>electronic items, sure it does. Coffee makers? Dishwashers? My stereo
>system? A car?
>No. Sure we COULD wire them, make them controlable via Matrix. But why
>should we? What would it add?
>Nothing. That's why a decker who tries to scald an enemy by tapping his
>shower to set it to "Hot" mode, well, I'd say "Nice try."

First, for items like that there could be a reason. If you wanted to
program all of those items from the office to go off when you got home,
you'd wire them. Right now Gates's home is supposed to play the music you
like when you walk into a room when you wear a funky badge. But that's not
what I'm talking about.

Its all of that low priority stuff that they have to be lax on security
with. The phones that can be dialed from an outside number. Public email
addresses for customer support. Their display catalogues for ordering
clothing online. The supply records for the building. All of these things
need to be accessed through the Matrix to talk to other people, and so by
definition can't be as heavily guarded as say security or R&D.

Instead or trying to spoof them, you flood them. You don't attack the
points that every runner looks at. You go after the mundane points of the
corp, and exploit their weaknesses there.


Sommers
Insert witty quote here.
Message no. 18
From: Tzeentch tzeentch666@*********.net
Subject: [Slightly OT]China and the Internet
Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1999 19:53:44 -0800
> I'd have to disagree on this. Automated homes seem all the rage even now,
> when our tech is considerably further behind SR.

They may be the neato keen thing now but in 2060 they are probably as quaint
as what people in the 1950s thought the "Home of the Future" would look
like.

>I think the apartments of wage slaves are almost always wired to the corp's
mainframe, and that mainframe is on the net.

It's probably hooked up into the equivalent of a home server to monitor
temperature, simple security, etc etc. They could use old 1990 era computers
for it. It could send data to another system if needed but it would not
necessarily need to be on the Matrix or be publicaly accessable (ie be part
of a private WAN). The data could be one way (ie it sends but not receive in
the same manner as SMB status updates) or only at certain times (to keep
connection costs and bandwidth down).

>As for cars, there is GridGuide, but the security
> on that must be horrible.

I would expect it's pretty decent actually, if just for insurance liability.
Whoever ran Gridguide would become quickly bankrupt if any script-kiddie (I
keep mentioning them because they are so damn annoying these days) could
hack it and cause mayhem.

Not to mention GPS would be so ungodly cheap in the future everyone and
their pet monkey could have access to it. Your new watch will display your
grid location down to a meter or so of accuracy etc etc. At least if you're
in a city with reference transmittings and hovering HALO craft.

Ken
>
> -Twist
>
>
Message no. 19
From: Tzeentch tzeentch666@*********.net
Subject: [Slightly OT]China and the Internet
Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1999 20:03:15 -0800
> >I don't doubt for one second that telco devices such as faxes,
telephones,
> >modems, computers, etc, will all be interconnected in a near future.
Hell,
> >it's happening right now.
> Its not even that they are interconnected. Its that they are running on
the
> same wiring. If all of this stuff runs over the same wire, and its all
> digital data, then you can manipulate it in the same way, or at least
block
> one kind with an overload of another kind.

Same wiring does not mean you can do anything with that data. Classified
packets of data right now are passing over your ISPs backbone router. Do you
see them? Nope, because only traffic heading for your ISPs network is kept
and passed on down to you.

> >But think for a second about that big word: "Everything". Why would a
corp
> >have an internal security system wired to the 'Net? Closed computers
full
> >of R&D data? Everything could be on the Matrix, yes, but not everything
> >SHOULD.
> They won't have internal security tied to the Matrix, unless they want to
> access it from off-site for some reason.

I could see them having some sort of "monitor" function but you would not be
able to turn alarms on or off or anything. That's just plain silly you
rascally deckers!

>Neither will the R&D data. But
> they will probably have some means of manually turning this access on when
> needed. For example, if you wanted to transfer all of that R&D data to the
> alternate facility, or you wanted to update the security files and
> procedures from the main office. In this case, its a good idea for a
> shadowrun to infiltrate the facility and flip that switch so that your
> decker can have his way with their system.

? Why not set up private LANs or simply have a really small "trusted system"
list. Not one the list of trusted systems (and since deckers have munged,
forged, or stolen access they can be guaranteed to not be on this list
except in remarkable cicrumstances).

You have to imagine how hard it would be to work with the security you
implement in this imaginary world. Would it be too hard to do your job? Then
they would not implement it. Even the goverment trades usablity over
security.

<snip smarthome>

> Its all of that low priority stuff that they have to be lax on security
> with. The phones that can be dialed from an outside number. Public email
> addresses for customer support. Their display catalogues for ordering
> clothing online. The supply records for the building. All of these things
> need to be accessed through the Matrix to talk to other people, and so by
> definition can't be as heavily guarded as say security or R&D.
>
> Instead or trying to spoof them, you flood them. You don't attack the
> points that every runner looks at. You go after the mundane points of the
> corp, and exploit their weaknesses there.

That makes for a pretty boring Shadowrun adventure though :) Not to mention
less then useful in most cases for a Shadowrun team (I suspect security
might be heightened if suddenly nothing works and your "water company"
shadowrunners "happen" to show up at the same time).

Ken

> Sommers
> Insert witty quote here.
Message no. 20
From: Twist0059@***.com Twist0059@***.com
Subject: [Slightly OT]China and the Internet
Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1999 23:15:53 EST
In a message dated 11/27/99 10:55:57 PM Eastern Standard Time,
tzeentch666@*********.net writes:

> >As for cars, there is GridGuide, but the security
> > on that must be horrible.
>
> I would expect it's pretty decent actually, if just for insurance
liability.
> Whoever ran Gridguide would become quickly bankrupt if any script-kiddie (I
> keep mentioning them because they are so damn annoying these days) could
> hack it and cause mayhem.


Note by horrible I meant in the "it will kill you in seconds" way. :-)




-Twist

"We've never backed away from evil incarnate before, Peter, why this?"
"Evil incarnate can't sue, Frank."
Message no. 21
From: Arclight arclight@*********.de
Subject: [Slightly OT]China and the Internet
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1999 13:23:22 +0100
And finally, Trinity expressed himself by writing:

<snip>

> But think for a second about that big word: "Everything". Why
> would a corp
> have an internal security system wired to the 'Net? Closed
> computers full
> of R&D data? Everything could be on the Matrix, yes, but not everything
> SHOULD.

Well, even as of today R&D is speeded up by using labs
in different time zones. When the Scientist in Stuttgart goes
home, his colleague in New Delhi (sp?) takes over the project
and so on. For this, you obviously need to access the data from
all over the world. You would do this over the Matrix.
On a second thought, you could seperate these com-lines
from the normal datastream by dedicated lines, but this would
be costly...

arclight
Message no. 22
From: Gurth gurth@******.nl
Subject: [Slightly OT]China and the Internet
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1999 13:36:10 +0100
According to Frank Pelletier (Trinity), at 21:07 on 27 Nov 99, the word on
the street was...

> No. Sure we COULD wire them, make them controlable via Matrix. But why
> should we? What would it add?

No idea what it would add, but look at the number of people who today are
proposing letting a computer run everything in your house, so you can use
your mobile phone to turn on the lights and fill the bathtub before you
get home. In SR, that would mean hooking everything to the Matrix, from
the bathtub to the lights to the electric blanket to the espresso machine.

Now personally, I absolutely see no point in doing any of this (but then
again, <rant>I don't see the point of mobile phones either unless you're
something like a doctor who _has_ to be reachable (and by that I don't
mean _wants_ to be reachable) at all times</rant>) but there are plenty of
people who do seem to see some kind of benefit to running a house like
this. One of the best reasons I can think of not doing this, BTW, is that
if the computer crashes (or some {ha|de}cker gets in), your house won't
work...

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Het is misschien kankerverwekkend, maar last heb je d'r niet van.
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
->The Plastic Warriors Page: http://shadowrun.html.com/plasticwarriors/<-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

GC3.1: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ UL P L+ E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+
PE Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 23
From: Da Twink Daddy datwinkdaddy@*******.com
Subject: [Slightly OT]China and the Internet
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1999 17:10:59 -0600 (CST)
Yesterday, Tzeentch spoke on Re: [Slightly OT]China and the Internet:

> > And the faxes now go through the Matrix. And the phones go through the
> > Matrix, no dial-up. Its all the same in SR, its all on the same system.
> The
> > amount of information going through these channels is going to increase
> > over the next 50 years, not decrease.
>
> Hey, careful assuming EVERYTHING is on the Matrix or you will quickly find
> yourself travelling down the slippery slope to <yuck> Cyberpunk 2020. There
> is a LOT of data and traffic being sent over the telco lines now that you
> can't see and there is no reason for you to see. There is absolutely no
> reason why this would change in the future. The whole concept of cyberspace
> has enough logical inconsistencies as it is without lumping every form of
> data into the "Matrix".

Well, you can't see it unless you look for it. Both normal phones and
faxes as well as cellular calls go through the matrix. (See desc of cell
phone in SR3). If you look for it, or better yet, write a smart frame,
you can kill all telephone calls/faxes coming from a certain building.
Sure, a coffee maker *might* not be hooked up to the 'trix, (There are
Java-enabled java machines now that can connect to a central datastore to
recall save customer info, credit, etc.) but it could be as well. Yes
there are whoe private nets like Sirpnet and Tirpnet. Those are, in VR 2
terms, PLTGs. In SR all info that's fit to be transmitted is tranmitted
SOME distance of the 'trix. [Okay, that was an over generaliztion --
There are systems off the 'trix and sometimes data couriers are used
instead of 'dial-up' net connections.]


As far as the existence of dial-up goes. It will certainly exist though
in a different form. Phone conversations are just like a download by VR2
rules so it will be quite different from what we use now.

*DTD is not thinking clearly so understand if he's babbling*

Da Twink Daddy
e-mail: bss03@*******.uark.edu
ICQ: 514984
Message no. 24
From: Da Twink Daddy datwinkdaddy@*******.com
Subject: [Slightly OT]China and the Internet
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1999 17:20:54 -0600 (CST)
Yesterday, Tzeentch spoke on Re: [Slightly OT]China and the Internet:

> ? Why not set up private LANs or simply have a really small "trusted
system"
> list. Not one the list of trusted systems (and since deckers have munged,
> forged, or stolen access they can be guaranteed to not be on this list
> except in remarkable cicrumstances).

I don't think this is enough, spoofing this kind of stuff is what
Decption, Masking, and Sleaze do.

Da Twink Daddy
e-mail: bss03@*******.uark.edu
ICQ: 514984
Message no. 25
From: Sommers sommers@*****.edu
Subject: [Slightly OT]China and the Internet
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 16:52:22 -0500
At 08:03 PM 11/27/99 -0800, you wrote:
> > >I don't doubt for one second that telco devices such as faxes,
>telephones,
> > >modems, computers, etc, will all be interconnected in a near future.
>Hell,
> > >it's happening right now.
> > Its not even that they are interconnected. Its that they are running on
>the
> > same wiring. If all of this stuff runs over the same wire, and its all
> > digital data, then you can manipulate it in the same way, or at least
>block
> > one kind with an overload of another kind.
>
>Same wiring does not mean you can do anything with that data. Classified
>packets of data right now are passing over your ISPs backbone router. Do you
>see them? Nope, because only traffic heading for your ISPs network is kept
>and passed on down to you.

First I wanted to say that I really enjoyed the other (long post) that you
wrote and it was very well thought out. I do agree with several of your
points. But the above statement might let me make my point perfectly.

Classified data packets are quite possibly passing over my backbone router
now since I'm in a University. No I can't see them, and it would take a bit
of effort to see them, let alone get to them. However, I can see the router
itself. If I started flooding that router with enough crap, all of the data
going to it is going to eventually get held up. That includes the basic
stuff that I can see and the classified stuff that I can't.

Now if I would try to do that to each router in the Aztech pyramid, I could
get the same effect. I probably wouldn't know all of the different types of
data that are going in there. But its all data, and it has been established
that they all go through the Matrix. I'm not looking at it as a "metaplane
of data" either. I'm looking at it as there are a few big rooms in that
pyramid where all of the fiber optic goes in from the outside world and
gets routed throughout the building. If you can cause enough spam, hang-up
phonecalls, router traces and what have you to go through that set of
routers, you can get them to shut down.

In fact, the corp will even help you with their own security measures. From
a physical wiring and security standpoint, its easier to send signals
through a few key chokepoints. If the company controls access to those,
they can control access to their system. What you do is block the access
between their system and the rest of the world. Its like all of your
plumbing in your house is working fine, but there's a big block between the
city water and your main pipe. As long as no water is coming in from the
outside, doesn't matter how good your other plumbing is.

I hope this explains what I was trying to say a little better.

Sommers
Insert witty quote here.

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about [Slightly OT]China and the Internet, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.